That’s a popular question.
Some people insist you lead with the business (and they tell you to offer the product as a last resort only if the prospect says No to the business); others say they’d rather lead with the product.
However, there is NO best way for all. Just like there’s no product for everyone.
Here are five questions to help you decide what YOU should do.
Remember, you’re the one leading, so choose what suits YOU. And no, it might not be the same way your upline tells you to lead. But the two of you might not have the same taste in music either, and that doesn’t bother anyone, does it?
The questions:
1. What really excites you more: The product or the business?
2. What do you identity with more: the product or the business?
3. What do you believe you can do better – talk about the product (and your experience with it) or the business?
4. Where do you have more credibility and believability? With your product experience or your business (this or previous business) experience?
5. What is your tolerance for rejection? It’s 10-50 times more if you lead with the business than the product.
There is no best way. There is only the what works best for you way at this time. So follow your inner voice. Once you have given that an honest try, you can always experiment with another approach.
After all, isn’t the entire thing an experiment? We don’t know the outcome for sure, do we? So start with as many advantages as you can: Know yourself, act on that information. Then you will have given yourself the best chance possible.
Kim, I love the article. Thanks for sharing your wisdom!
Glad you enjoyed it, Paula!
–Kim
It might also be an idea to consider just what the prospect might want from the deal – which ought to be something of which the seller should become aware during an initial pre-pitch discovery process.
The presentation may then be structured accordingly, delivering pertinent information in the manner most likely to be conducive to enabling the prospect to make a wise decision – something to which what we, as seller, either want or are good at/excited by is strictly secondary.
‘Madam, as I’m sure aware, the Range Rover is an excellent vehicle for both on- and off-road use. In addition to the obvious prestige, it presents luxury comfort and rugged reliability. Please tell me, what initially drew you to the vehicle?’
It’s a helluva lot easier to help someone buy what they want than it is to sell them what you want.
Gulliver,
It’s easier (and faster) still to find people who want the same thing I do and sell to them.
I love green eggs and ham.
Someone found me by asking me, “Hey Suzanne – you like green eggs and ham? Really! Check out THIS company’s green eggs and ham!”
I check out Green Eggs and Ham, Inc.
Sure enough, I love their green eggs and ham. I love them so much, I decide to take the company up on it’s offer to earn income by finding others who love green eggs and ham and let ’em know about the company and the fabulous green eggs and ham I get from them.
So, in my life, either on purpose or in the course of my day when the opportunity presents itself, I ask others, “Hey…you like green eggs and ham?”
If I get a “Yeah- I love green eggs and ham!” or a “I don’t know – never had ’em, but they sound good”, then I say, “Check out Green Eggs and Ham, Inc. I love them! You might, too. Here’s the website.”
If I get a “Ewwwww..!!! Green eggs and ham? Ick!” then I drop it and move on.
As long as I don’t have the “everyone should love green eggs and ham as much as I do” mentality or the “I’ve got to make my millions pushing these green eggs and ham on anyone who eats” mentality, I won’t waste time trying to convince the wrong ones to check out Green Eggs and Ham, Inc.
This way, I’ll only be selling to those who like or are willing to try green eggs and ham. The rest of the world can go on eating whatever they like, and getting whatever it is they like from someone else. No skin off my nose.
Way less hassle. Way less stress. Way less rejection. Still somewhere to go for Christmas dinner.
Suzanne
Lead with the product… Lead with the opportunity… Neither one. Lead with the Relationship.
It’s the only way to learn what gulliver points out: Just what THEY are interested in (as well as the best way to present that to them if you’ve got what they want).
Gulliver,
I was trained like you mentioned but after doing it that way for 4 years. I find myself that each time I have a conversation with someone, its as if I’m setting a trap up for them. Of course I get some sales and reps but I did not feel good about it. And these customers and reps did not stay long with me.
Suzanne,
Now that I’m looking for people like me, I find it more relaxing and more fun.
Kim,
I bought your materials long time ago (3-4 years back) and they really resonated with me. But I didn’t put them into practice since my upline leader’s (of that time) does not subscribe to what you teach.
I know I should have just do it myself…(at that time your teachings were just on my vent list)….
Anyway, now your teachings are on my change list.
After doing due diligence and searching around, I’m now with a different company and organization who resonates with me and subsribes to your teachings!
🙂 Thank God!
This time its a lot more fun doing the business. Thanks Kim!
Hi John –
What does it mean to lead with the ‘relationship’?
What relationship? One they already have with the other person? Or the one they’re trying to create with a person they don’t know yet?
What are the words they would use to lead with the relationship, if it were neither telling them an authentic product or business story (to see if they might know anyone like that)?
Are you advocating the old FORM approach where they lead with conversations about Family, Occupation, Recreation or Money to find out what the other person might be looking for and then try to sell them something?
Not clear what it means to “lead with the relationship.”
What does that mean someone would say (or whatever means of starting the communication), to someone else?
Hi Gulliver:
Of course I understand your point here. However, playing to someone else’s hot button has not been all that effective for many people. Because it often comes across like – whatever it is you want, lady, I’ve got it. This will do whatever you want.
But people don’t believe that stuff anymore. GM has done it as has Ford – try to be “everything for everyone.” Now they have no identity at all. And no one feels any connect. And they’re losing millions and laying off 25-20% of their work force. Ford recently announced they would stop trying to be all things to all people.
Products and people that have a voice, an identity, seem to do better, because people can identify or not, right away. And when a marketer expresses that id, or their worldview, up front, it offers an instant kind of mini-bond, or not. Kind of like asking, “Does anyone here play tennis?”
If yes, you have an immediate connect and possible tennis friend. If not, they might know someone. So it’s matchmaking, but from the inside out. Not “What do you want I have it, but more “Here’s what I have and here’s why, do we have a match?” So niche marketing, if you will. Looking for people like yourself because that’s who you are and you’re looking to expand the group with like minded ones.
It’s specializing, like cardiologists – who specialize in heart work. Versus the GP who does a little of everything. You can choose which one you want to be. Those who prefer the specialist route can get really good at one thing, and generally earn more because of it. Who’d you rather visit if you had a heart problem – a specialist or a GP?
Some take the GP route. And for some problems, that works fine.
So for me, it’s more about me looking for people who share my worldview, than to change someone else’s or give the impression my thing matches all worldviews. Which then becomes meaningless and an obvious sales ploy.
In my classes, I teach those who want to find people like themselves, with similar world views, how to do that. And when they try that, the urge to convert kind of dissipates. That is a good thing, in my opinion.
But like the Buddha says, one must try it and see how that feels for oneself first, then decide which course to follow.
Since a few folk have specifically mentioned me when replying, I’ll pick-up the points individually with ‘more mafia-hitman diplomacy’…
>Suzanne: It’s easier (and faster) still to find people who want the same thing I do and sell to them.
Of course. Agreed.
And, ‘proper marketing’ (presenting in a manner likely to draw enquiries, rather than simply approaching folk with a view to selling), will draw those with their own agenda – which requires an appropriate response.
Plus, considering the pricing differential between many NM products and conventional counterparts, their appeal is reduced if isolated from the ‘opportunity’.
The gambit of ‘I ask others, “Hey… you like green eggs and ham?”‘ is of course a rework of the ‘Please tell me, what initially drew you to the vehicle?’ thing and entirely in accord with the point: ‘It’s a helluva lot easier to help someone buy what they want than it is to sell them what you want’.
>J’s point of ‘Lead with the Relationship’ has a lot of merit… although it’s often over-cooked in practice and some folk spend eons trying to construct (through irrelevant small talk) artificial relationships of no great substance, rather than allow nature to take its course in the ebb-and-flow of ‘exploratory conversation’ – which as he says is ‘the only way to learn what THEY are interested in (as well as the best way to present that to them if you’ve got what they want).
Example: Would you rather walk into an eaterie/auto-lot and have an enthusiastic waiter/saleshand tell you their view of what you should eat/drive? Or would you prefer be asked then guided wisely?
>Ihsan: I have a conversation with someone, its as if I’m setting a trap up for them. Of course I get some sales and reps but I did not feel good about it.
Interesting. Sounds like you’re simply lacking the confidence to present assertively – perhaps uncomfortable with the stuff you’re pushing.
>K: However, playing to someone else’s hot button has not been all that effective for many people.
Absolutely. Why? …likely because many NM-ers don’t bother to appropriately familiarise themselves with the stuff they’re pushing… and are often woefully lacking in commercially-oriented presentation skills – which leads to the too-common scenario of ‘say anything’ overstatement in which credibility rapidly vanishes.
On the ‘it’s more about me looking for people who share my worldview’ point… that’s also whom many others are chasing – and leads back to my opening point of this comment. And, considered objectively, the combo of appropriate product knowledge + presentation skills + ethics presents the opportunity to deliver more successful presentations to a wider audience.
I have sponsored large numbers of people over the years leading with the opportunity.
I no longer teach that format in my system as I have found it to be too “people skill” dependent and not as duplicable by the average rep.
The system I teach recommends sharing the product.
Great commentary by all. There are several conflicting truths here that are all valid. This type of discussion helps me sort out my own thoughts a great deal, and I appreciate everyones involvement.
Stan -this is an interesting point:
I no longer teach that format in my system as I have found it to be too “people skill” dependent and not as duplicable by the average rep.
It’s interesting because seems to me you are saying that you have to “dumb down” the way of doing business to the level of the least skilled, rather than raise the skills of those you work with.
Do you really think you have to make it so that “anyone can do it”?
This is a response to my response from John Fogg, who couldn’t connect…
What does it mean to lead with the ‘relationship’?
– Spend some time learning who and how the other person is.
What relationship? One they already have with the other person? Or the one they’re trying to create with a person they don’t know yet?
– Either or both.
What are the words they would use to lead with the relationship, if it were neither telling them an authentic product or business story (to see if they might know anyone like that)?
– Where do you live? (or whatever. Obviously, you don’t ask your mom that one.) Then, listen for the other person’s values and what’s important to him or her and ask questions.
Are you advocating the old FORM approach where they lead with conversations about Family, Occupation, Recreation or Money to find out what the other person might be looking for and then try to sell them something?
No.
Not clear what it means to “lead with the relationship.”
Now…?
Hi John:
Not clear, sorry.
Do you really mean, “Lead by starting a relationship” (for people you don’t know) and if so, what questions would you suggest someone ask to do that, besides, “Where do you live?”
What questions would they be that are not FORM then?
(Not that FORM is good or bad, it just is.)
In blatantly trying to hijack the conversation, please allow me to butt-in again…
This whole relationship thing…
At risk of over-simplifying things – we simply need to engage ‘them’. To get their genuine attention.
That ‘Vince… where do you live?’ routine is, I posit, an example of dangerously-flawed thinking which ‘leads to schlocky inauthentic associations which often don’t last or really deliver the expected benefits’.
Further on in the piece from which that line is drawn, Fogg’s right-on with this: ‘You’re after people’s values, their dreams, their aspirations, what’s most important to them in their lives.’
Absolutely. And, as best can be done withing the confines of a commercial encounter, that process has to be undertaken authentically – and there are smarter ways to approach it than with ‘where’.
————-
Money, honey…
[SUMMARY… Just do the deal. Are relationships over-rated?]
Many in NM follow the ‘My Friend is my Partner’ view of ‘build the relationship, then the business’ philosophy. It’s a sensible point, to which there is of course a counterpoint: ‘just do the business’.
It’s sometimes (not too often) been suggested that there’s simply too much emphasis on this ‘relationship thing’. In no other industry is there such a pre-occupation with ‘to build the business, develop a relationship’.
The hardline view is blunt: ‘It leads to schlocky inauthentic associations which often don’t last or really deliver the expected benefits’.
So then, do we really need to build a close relationship with someone to be able to do business with them? Or can we simply ‘just do the deal’ and buy or sell?
Moreover, does ‘just do the business’ encourage the formation and development of more authentic and commercially-worthwhile associations in which there’s no false premise?
I have a relationship with WalMart, Apple, Microsoft, Honda and others… I’m a customer. The relationship is one of convenience… we each have something the other wants – and so an automobile, computer or whatever is swapped for cash. Simple and effective. We all understand the deal and it neither needs nor benefits from a ‘let’s be friends’ stance.
Over time, I may buy more – or less – from them and others… basing my decision on ‘is this something I want or need, of appropriate quality and price?’. With continuing good service, the relationship grows; with poor service, it obviously falters. And there’s no misunderstanding.
So why not the same with NM? Do we have to ‘get close’ to do business with someone – or can we simply relax with ‘a good product, well presented’? And conversely, next time we’re mall-surfing, would we be a) ‘more’ or b) ‘less’ likely to buy if the directness was replaced by ‘relationshipping’? Of course, this rhetorical line is entirely fatuous; NM is different from retailing and conventional commerce, isn’t it? Is it? Really?
Just as in franchising and corporate deals, ‘shopping’ is best done on the merits of the individual deal. And a bizop is no different. It doesn’t need a relationship and trying to put one in place unbeneficially distorts the situation.
Let’s be clear… they want my cash, I may want what they’re offering. NM is no different.
————-
“It doesn’t need a relationship and trying to put one in place unbeneficially distorts the situation.”
Yeah, please… deliver me from having a relationship with my customers… and especially my “downline business partners”. I mean, WHY would I want to have a relationship with them…? How unbeneficial… how distorted….
I do apologize for the scarcasm, but that perspective is utterly absurd nonesense.
Aaahhh, the sound of opposing worldviews clashing.
‘…still the man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest’, as I made plainly clear… the balance is to be found in the nature of the relationship – specifically whether it is forced or natural.
So, with Time the ultimate arbiter…
—
I’m gonna let you pass
And I’ll go last.
Then time will tell just who fell
And who’s been left behind,
When you go your way and I go mine.
—-